Camels Charging in the Libyan Desert

Run Boys - I'll Take Care of this Photographer!

Don’t try to tell me that camels can’t talk to one another.

I’ve just returned from a trip to Colonel Gadaffi’s Libya, having disregarded warnings before I left that it was a dangerous country and I would have to be on my guard.

But it wasn’t the Colonel’s secret police, the army, or street muggers that sent me running – it was an angry camel!

I was crossing a desert east of Tripoli when I saw a group of camels that I thought might make a good picture. Not that groups of camels make particular good pictures but I never believe in turning down the chance to take a photo that I might regret later. So I jumped out of the car and used a wide angle lens, perhaps 3m from the camels, planning to move further back and take some shots with a telephoto lens afterwards.

The leader of the pack clearly took exception to my presence, turned to his furry tribe and emitted an ear-splitting bellow. I am now convinced that this was camel talk for: ‘This guy is taking pictures without permission. We’ve had a chat about these meddling tourists before. All of you take off and I’ll teach him a thing or two.’

With that, the rest of the group, including a number of infants, began scampering away – while the leader came lumbering towards me, hollering (in camel-speak): ‘Right, you’re for it now’.

I managed to take one picture while he was almost on top of me, then turned and ran for my life back to the car.

Looking at the picture later I was quite pleased with the effect – the close-up of the angry leader and the others dashing off in the background. I was also ‘quite pleased’ that I’d got out of there with all my limbs attached.

As for the rest of the Libyan population, I found them to be kind and non-threatening to the point that, smitten by hunger pains at 1am, I was able to leave my hotel and walk through some very dark back streets to an all-night take-away pizza joint and return without so much as a glance in my direction.

Perhaps the locals were aware that messing with a tourist would result in a fate worse than death…such as being dumped among a group of angry camels in the desert.

* See the Gallery for more pictures of Libya.

 
Pearl Carter and Phil Bailey, said to be having a child together

Granny Pearl and grandson Phil - soon to be a mum and dad?

It’s a story that has raced around the world, shocking and sickening everyone – the tale of a sex-mad grandmother and her grandson who are expecting a baby together.

I’m waiting to hear more from this couple in the hope that they can confirm this weird arrangement or write it off as a hoax. I suspect the time is drawing near for the truth to out. Meanwhile, allow your mind to boggle….
Grey-haired Pearl Carter and her 26-year-old grandson Phil Bailey are madly in love with one another, they are reported as saying, and while she is well past the age of bearing a child herself, they say they are eagerly awaiting the baby that is developing in the womb of a surrogate mother.
The abhorrent love match between the granny and her grandson, 46 years her junior, has been turning stomachs as it speeds around the globe, bloggers saying it has left them feeling uncomfortable and dirty.
Little wonder when Miss Carter talks in an interview of luring Mr Bailey into her bedroom, kissing and seducing him, leaving him to claim later that ‘making love to Pearl was a real eye opener. It was love combined with all this sexual tension that had been building up.’
Realising she could not give her young lover a child, Miss Carter has used her retirement money of £20,000 to find a surrogate mother and buy a donor egg to inseminate with Mr Bailey’s sperm.
A sensational and stomach-churning story that has run big in a New Zealand women’s magazine this week – and left computer screens burning hot as it has whizzed through cyberspace.
But is it true?
While many readers believe the couple are living in New Zealand, New Idea, the Auckland-based magazine which is running the story has failed to mention any home town or even a country where the couple are living.
The original story appears to have emerged from the United States, in fact, for a more detailed version run on America’s News Relay website describes the couple as living in Indiana.
Whether News Relay picked it up from another source is uncertain for the story has been running out of control on the web. But it appears to have been around for at least a week to enable New Idea in New Zealand to pick it up and publish it.
There have been claims by bloggers that the affair is so gross that it just cannot be true, while others suggest that a photo of the couple, with Mr Bailey’s arms around his grandmother, has been manipulated. Another blogger suggests that the photos might be real but a prankster has written a fanciful story to go with them.
While the grandmother and grandson are certain to soon emerge to confirm their story if there is any truth in it, we can only ponder over the claims in the astonishing tale.
According to the couple, Miss Carter had an illegitimate child, Lynette, when she was 18 while living with her Catholic parents in Indiana. The child, a girl, was given away to prevent the family’s shame.
Miss Carter never saw her daughter again and eventually married, but had no more children.
Meanwhile in 1983, so the story goes, Lynette had a baby of her own – Phil – and raised him as a single mother.
Now Mr Bailey says that when he was 18 he learned his mother’s story – and she also told him that she was dying from brain cancer. Six months later she passed away and he decided to track down his grandmother. It was three years before he found her and wrote her a letter.
Miss Carter was stunned to hear from him and when she saw his photo ‘I thought what a handsome and sexy man he was before pinching myself – he was my grandson!’
She says a friend told her about Genetic Sexual Attraction, which occurs when close relatives are attracted to each other.
In 2006, the story claims, grandmother and grandson met for the first time and, Miss Carter declares, ‘from the first moment that I saw him, I knew we would never have a (normal) grandmother-grandson relationship. For the first time in years I felt sexually alive.’
Mr Bailey, a carpenter,  says: ‘I wanted to kiss her there and then. My feelings were overwhelming.’
They went shopping together, dined together – and in the second week she lured him to her bedroom, expecting rejection ‘but instead he kissed me back.’
They set up home together and make love three times a week, unable to keep their hands off each other.
Then they talked of having a baby together – and surrogate mother Roxanne Campbell came into their lives after reading their appeal in an advertisement.
Now heavily pregnant, Roxanne admits she was initially shocked when she learned of the relationship between the budding parents, whom she sees once a month when they accompany her for scans.
‘I make no apologies and I believe God’s given me a second chance,’ says Miss Carter. ‘I never in a million years thought at 72 I’d be “pregnant”.’
Time will now tell if this is a phantom pregnancy – or whether, in a few weeks, an elderly woman and her grandson will be strolling down the street with a pushchair containing their baby – amid a storm of outrage.
* Read my story in London’s Daily Mail, here:
Noah's Ark clip art

Noah's Ark - Have they found it this time?

Ah, so they’ve found Noah’s Ark again. Is this Ark no.1 or Ark no.2 or…oh, I don’t know, I give up.

Controversy is raging around the world over the reported discovery of the Ark, 4,800 years after it is believed to have come to rest on a mountain in Turkey. There have been claims before that the Ark had been discovered on Mt Ararat after a huge boat-like structure of what was thought to have been petrified wood, was found by religious groups – but that ‘Ark’ has been largely dismissed as a natural geographical look-alike.
Now a team of fundamentalist Christians say they have ‘99.9 percent’ evidence they have found the Ark’s final resting place. Digging underground on the slopes of Mt Ararat, they say they have found chambers where the two-by-two animals that Noah is recorded in the Bible as taking on board before a great flood swept the land were kept.
It is said that if the group really have found the Ark, it would be the greatest coup in the history of archaelogy. Terrific. Inspiring. We all want to believe it.
But I, for one, dragged to my local Baptist church by relatives when I was younger and where I learned virtually every Old and New Testament story back to front, have my doubts that this is the Ark. Common sense in my older wisdom tells me that a ship that could hold two of each animal species from the Middle East – let alone the world – would have to be enormous.
All right, so Noah, warned by God that a huge flood was coming, set about building his Ark. Where on earth did he find all those long planks, the length of a football field, that would be required to make a huge boat? How did he make it totally waterproof? Boatbuilders say that keeping out leaks in a wooden boat that size would be a huge problem. Water seeping, or perhaps pouring, in would make the vessel unstable and just think of the size of the rudder that would be needed to keep a straight course – an army of men would be needed to manoeuvre it.
Mike Pitt, a British archaeologist, notes that if there had been a flood capable of lifting a huge ship some 4km up the side of a mountain 4,800 years ago, there would have to be substantial geological evidence for this flood around the world. And there isn’t.
The story of Noah and his Ark is in the Book of Genesis and relates how God commanded him to build the vast ship for himself, his family and ‘two of every sort of animal’. Then we learn how the flood waters rose until all life, except fish, is destroyed.
The question then arises, says Oxford University lecturer Nicholas Purcel, how the complex societies of Egypt and Mesopotamia, already centuries old, survived.
Perhaps the ‘new’ Ark, will give us some answers. Unless it turns out to be the remnants of an ancient mountain hut.
But as I said earlier, I want to believe…I really do.
Tagged with:
 
Christopher Roberts in the Papua New Guinea Jungle

Chris Roberts, with Jack Lemmon's double bass, playing to Papua New Guinea tribespeople (in their Western bras!) (Copyright Richard Shears)

This is a sneak preview of some of the amazing stories that will be appearing in my forthcoming book about the life and times of a foreign correspondent.

The picture, taken in 1982, is of musician Christopher Roberts who trudged through the jungles of Papua New Guinea playing Bach recitals to remote tribes. Well, fairly remote that is, because the missionaries had got to them first and given all the ladies brassieres to wear, which they insisted on wearing for the photos I took.
But that double bass Christopher is playing has a fascinating history. For it featured in the 1959 comedy Some Like it Hot, starring Jack Lemmon, Tony Curtis and Marilyn Monroe. In the movie, Jack is seen running from The Mob, who unleash a hail of machine gun bullets at him. They hit the double bass he is carrying on his back…
Years later, Christopher saw the double bass in a music shop in Los Angeles, complete with the bullet holes – actually the work of a Hollywood carpenter – and bought the instrument for $100. Then he took it off to the jungles of Papua New Guinea and in exchange for his music the tribes gave him some of theirs, playing on their drums and singing.
If you look carefully you can see the ‘bullet holes’ under his left hand, although he has filled them in with putty! There is so much more to this extraordinary story, particularly as Christopher is now a famous musician and composer. As for what happened to the double bass since this picture was taken – well, all will be revealed…..

A couple find a quiet corner in Singapore's Raffles Hotel

A couple find a quiet corner in Singapore's Raffles Hotel

Johannes Gutenberg, of course, was the German inventor who in 1440 revolutionised the communications world with his printing press, a cumbersome machine that threatened to bring an end to pen and ink.

Why am I introducing this with a photo from Singapore? I’ll explain why below, suffice it to say that it helps to illustrate my point that our way of life does not have to change simply because a new form of communication enters the market place. We still need to think.
But back to Gutenberg for a moment. His printing press, along with that of William Caxton who introduced a similar method to England later, was to remain the prominent means of communication on a mass scale until the late 19th century.
Newspapers and book publishers used refined versions of their machines to transfer text and images onto paper. But pen and ink persisted.
Along the way, as the clunky printing presses were improved, came the typewriter, invented by Christopher Sholes and manufactured by the Remington Arms company in 1873. It was a revolution, speeding up office work and providing authors and journalists a means of producing readable text. Pen and ink remained, however.
And then, of course, came the computer. It killed off the typewriter as a tool for communicating and gave us all a speedy means of writing, along with unlimited access to information. I found its introduction a great asset when writing newspaper stories or books – no more telephoning libraries or hunting through thousands of cuttings to check out a fact. The information could be found in a flash.
The computer has become so popular that many turned to it as their main source of information. And as newspapers began feeding their stories to online readers – because their competitors were doing it and the public had come to expect it – sales of the printed newspapers began to fall.
Now the imminent announcement of a new form of computer from Apple is set to take communications further. There are predictions that it will be the nail in the coffin for newspapers, just as doomsayers are insisting that the introducing of devices like the Kindle digital reader will be the death of the printed book.
Despite these incredible advances, I still have to be convinced that all the things we love – pulling out a pocket book to read on a beach, spreading out a newspaper on the coffee table – will die. It’s very difficult to read any kind of screen in the sunlight and seeing people working at a laptop in a coffee shop just doesn’t seem right (even though I do it myself). And still pen and paper remain.
For all the great advances in technology we can’t live without our pen and paper. OK, emails have sounded the death knell for the old fashioned letter, but you still need a pen and paper to jot down the odd note. You can’t use a fancy digital voice recorder in a court room. You can’t do anything at all if the battery on your computer runs flat. Yes, you can write what appears to be a good book with the assistance of special programmes that correct your spelling and guide you into creating a grammatically correct sentence, but it doesn’t make you a writer.
Technology cannot do anything to change who we are, what we want, alter the intelligence, awareness, call it what you like, we were born with. Sit two people who  do not write for a living side by side, one with a pen and one with a computer, and ask them to compose, say 500 words about anything they wish. I’ll bet the computer writer turns out a very neat project, but I wonder if the person with the pen will have shown more heart in his or her words because he or she has had no technical assistance to call upon.
We still can’t live without our pen and paper, which has been with us for much longer than any mechanically or technically-produced text. It’s our fall-back when modern means fail.
The question, which no-one could have dreamed of asking a decade ago, is: are books and newspapers going to die? Some newspapers will – and have – and digital book readers will become popular but I believe the printed word, just like pen and ink, will persist. Books and newspapers will be able to live side by side with the computer, despite Apple’s fantastic advances. There are interesting times ahead.
But what has all this to do with my photo of Singapore? Well, stopping off in the island republic for a couple of days I was struck by the fact that just about every one of the thousands of tourists was carrying a camera (digital of course), some of them very expensive models. These advanced cameras have changed how the mechanical side of photography works. I watched as tourists pointed them at everything, pressed the shutter, assured that the camera would get the focusing and the exposure right. To hell with composition or finding a more interesting angle. Leave it all to the camera. Then they flew home with hundreds, perhaps thousands, of pictures on the memory card, all  perfectly exposed – but absolutely boring shots because no demands had been placed upon them to think: the camera was going to do that for them.
This is not a rave against technology. I love the advances, but there are areas of the world of communication that I believe will never die because there are people who believe that technological advances will never replace our ability to think. We need our in-hand newspapers not only to keep us in touch with what’s going on around us but also because you can read them anywhere at any time and keep on reading them for hours on end without the fear of a battery dying.
As for Singapore, I tried to be different. My simple camera could do it all, but a fine photograph needs a human brain to compose it. Hence, I decided to spend day photographing ‘circles and arches’ – a theme, a project, to make me work at it. Just as we have to work at clinging to a world of communications that is slipping away from us as technology takes over. Because there are some things we cannot do without – the feel of a book in our pocket, that newspaper in the coffee shop and, yes, a pen and paper.
Here are a few circles and arches from Singapore – and perhaps we, too, will go full circle one day and end up with pen and paper. Wait until the next power failure and see if I’m right.

A model poses in an arched walkway in Singapore

A model poses in an arched walkway in Singapore

Johannes Gutenberg, of course, was the German inventor who in 1440 revolutionised the communications world with his printing press, a cumbersome machine that threatened to bring an end to pen and ink.

Why am I introducing this with a photo from Singapore? I’ll explain why below, suffice it to say that it helps to illustrate my point that our way of life does not have to change simply because a new form of communication enters the market place. We still need to think.

But back to Gutenberg for a moment. His printing press, along with that of William Caxton who introduced a similar method to England later, was to remain the prominent means of communication on a mass scale until the late 20th century.

Newspapers and book publishers used refined versions of Gutenberg’s and Caxton’s machines to transfer text and images onto paper. But pen and ink persisted.

Along the way, as the clunky printing presses were improved, came the typewriter, invented by Christopher Sholes and manufactured by the Remington Arms company in 1873. It was a revolution, speeding up office work and providing authors and journalists a means of producing readable text. Pen and ink remained, however.

And then, of course, came the computer. It killed off the typewriter as a tool for communicating and gave us all a speedy means of writing, along with unlimited access to information. I found its introduction a great asset when writing newspaper stories or books – no more telephoning libraries or hunting through thousands of cuttings to check out a fact. The information could be found in a flash.

The computer has become so popular that many turned to it as their main source of information. And as newspapers began feeding their stories to online readers – because their competitors were doing it and the public had come to expect it – sales of the printed newspapers began to fall.

Now the imminent announcement of a new form of computer from Apple is set to take communications further. There are predictions that it will be the nail in the coffin for newspapers, just as doomsayers are insisting that the introducing of devices like the Kindle digital reader will be the death of the printed book.

Despite these incredible advances, I still have to be convinced that all the things we love – pulling out a pocket book to read on a beach, spreading out a newspaper on the coffee table – will die. It’s very difficult to read any kind of screen in the sunlight and seeing people working at a laptop in a coffee shop just doesn’t seem right (even though I do it myself). And still pen and paper remain.

For all the great advances in technology we can’t live without our pen and paper. OK, emails have sounded the death knell for the old fashioned letter, but you still need a pen and paper to jot down the odd note. You can’t use a fancy digital voice recorder in a court room. You can’t do anything at all if the battery on your computer runs flat. Yes, you can write what appears to be a good book with the assistance of special programmes that correct your spelling and guide you into creating a grammatically correct sentence, but it doesn’t make you a writer.

Technology cannot do anything to change who we are, what we want, alter the intelligence, awareness, call it what you like, we were born with. Sit two people who  do not write for a living side by side, one with a pen and one with a computer, and ask them to compose, say 500 words about anything they wish. I’ll bet the computer writer turns out a very neat project, but I wonder if the person with the pen will have shown more heart in his or her words because he or she has had no technical assistance to call upon.

We still can’t live without our pen and paper, which has been with us for much longer than any mechanically or technically-produced text. It’s our fall-back when modern means fail.

The question, which no-one could have dreamed of asking a decade ago, is: are books and newspapers going to die? Some newspapers will – and have – and digital book readers will become popular but I believe the printed word, just like pen and ink, will persist. Books and newspapers will be able to live side by side with the computer, despite Apple’s fantastic advances. There are interesting times ahead.

But what has all this to do with my photo of Singapore? Well, stopping off in the island republic for a couple of days I was struck by the fact that just about every one of the thousands of tourists was carrying a camera (digital of course), some of them very expensive models. These advanced cameras have changed how the mechanical side of photography works. I watched as tourists pointed them at everything, pressed the shutter, assured that the camera would get the focusing and the exposure right. To hell with composition or finding a more interesting angle. Leave it all to the camera. Then they flew home with hundreds, perhaps thousands, of pictures on the memory card, all  perfectly exposed – but absolutely boring shots because no demands had been placed upon them to think: the camera was going to do that for them.

This is not a rave against technology. I love the advances, but there are areas of the world of communication that I believe will never die because there are people who believe that technological advances will never replace our ability to think. We need our in-hand newspapers not only to keep us in touch with what’s going on around us but also because you can read them anywhere at any time and keep on reading them for hours on end without the fear of a battery dying.

As for Singapore, I tried to be different. My simple camera could do it all, but a fine photograph needs a human brain to compose it. Hence, I decided to spend day photographing ‘circles and arches’ – a theme, a project, to make me work at it. Just as we have to work at clinging to a world of communications that is slipping away from us as technology takes over. Because there are some things we cannot do without – the feel of a book in our pocket, that newspaper in the coffee shop and, yes, a pen and paper.

Here’s another circular sample from Singapore (others are in the photo gallery) – and perhaps we, too, will go full circle one day and end up with pen and paper. Wait until the next power failure and see if I’m right.

A food court in Singapore.

A food court in Singapore.